Ramkesh Meena Son Of Soji Lal Meena vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jp:11160)
2024 Latest Caselaw 1515 Raj/2

Rajasthan High Court

Ramkesh Meena Son Of Soji Lal Meena vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jp:11160) on 4 March, 2024

Author: Anil Kumar Upman

Bench: Anil Kumar Upman

[2024:RJ-JP:11160]

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                      BENCH AT JAIPUR
          S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1245/2024

 1.       Ramkesh Meena Son Of Soji Lal Meena, Aged About 25
          Years, Resident Of Village Dhanoogaon, Nainwa, District
          Bundi (Raj.) (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur)
 2.       Durgesh Meena Son Of Kanhaiya Lal Meena, Aged About
          23 Years, Resident Of Kolaheda District Bundi (Raj.) (At
          Present Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur)
                                                      ----Petitioners
                                Versus
 1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
 2.       Manish Kumar Yadav Son Of Gajraj, Aged About 23 Years,
          Resident Of Mirapur Farm Dwarkapura, Police Station
          Pragpura, District Jaipur Presently Tenent Kallawala
          Chouraha Vatika Road, Police Station Sanganer, District
          Jaipur (Raj.)
 3.       Narendra Kumar Yadav Son Of Shri Ramkunwar Yadav,
          Aged About 23 Years, Resident Of Village Tulsipura, Tehsil
          Paota, Police Station Pragpura, District Kotputli Behroad
          Presently Nursery Residency Second Floor, S-9 Vaishali
          Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.)
                                                    ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kailash Chand Meena For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.K. Sheoran, PP Mr. Hari Ram Gurjar

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

Order

04/03/2024

1. The complainant/victim/respondents Nos.2 & 3 are present

in person before the Court and they have been duly identified by

their respective counsel.

2. By way of this criminal misc. petition under Section 482 of

the Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused-petitioners have

approached this Court with a prayer to quash the FIR No.95/2024

registered at Police Station Shivdaspura, Jaipur City (South) for

the offences punishable under Sections 323, 342, 364-A, 384 & 34

of IPC.

[2024:RJ-JP:11160] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-1245/2024]

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on account

of financial dispute between the parties, present FIR has been

lodged and now by the intervention of the respectable persons of

the society, the petitioners have entered into a compromise with

the respondents Nos.2 & 3. The affidavit sworn by the

respondents Nos.2 & 3 has been annexed with this petition as

Annexure-2. 7.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the

judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Shiji @ Pappu &

Ors. Vs. Radhika & Anr. reported in (2011) 10 SCC 705.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the

complainant do not dispute the aforesaid factual position. Learned

counsel submits that respondents Nos.2 & 3 are not intending to

prosecute the petitioners and they have no objection, if the FIR in

question is quashed.

6. In view of the aforesaid and considering the submissions

made on behalf of the respective parties; the material made

available for my perusal; considering that the parties have

resolved their dispute and also finding that the present case is

wholly covered by the principle of law laid down by Hon'ble the

Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab &

Anr-reported in 2012 Cr.L.J. (SC) 4934 and in the case of

State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Choudhary Bhajan Lal & Ors.

[AIR 1992 SC 604] and in Shiji @ Pappu & Ors. Vs. Radhika

& Anr. (2011) 10 SCC 705, the aforesaid FIR is liable to be

quashed in view of compromise arrived at between the parties.

[2024:RJ-JP:11160] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-1245/2024]

7. In view of the above, this criminal misc. petition is allowed

and FIR No.95/2024 registered at Police Station Shivdaspura,

Jaipur City (South) is quashed and set aside. The petitioners shall

be released from the prison forthwith, if not warranted in any

other case.

8. The stay application stands disposed of.

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

59-Nirmala

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)